Cloak and HULC - Likely [Real world] kit by 2020?

[Rocky]

Assuming a rough timeline of 2020 for this next installment of the franchise, I was wondering if we could get a breakdown of the collective thought on the likelyhood of this possible new equipment -the M1 Security Blanket(?)/Cloak and the HULC- showing up in anyones inventory within the next decade or so.

For the record.

Posted on behalf on NoQuarter.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Pave Low

[Evilducky]

I said 50% chance. Tech right now is advancing at an incredible fast pace as it is I think its very well possible that in the next 10 years we could see this in an inventory.

They have an HULC prototype now that they just need to shrink down to make it more realistic to actually use.

[AlienShogun]

It's questionable. Reactive camo is more being tested for application on vehicles at the moment. The problem with it is that thermal sees right through it. Most top tier Armies and PMCs use thermal sights, so the tech isn't exactly a 1st priority.

The other thing that I stated in a previous post is that there are many examples of concept/prototype/test military gear that was in the ghost recon games that never made it into real world combat application such as the OICW, XM8 and the Land Warrior system ( It was tested but never really used).

There is a good chance that this tech will either never come to fruition or just the R&D alone on it will lead to something else.

Hell the 20mm laser range designated grenades in ghost recon 2 were still in development a few years ago and may even still be, but they were having issues with pre mature detonation. That project may or may not be scrapped as well by now.

I would say that the tech won't ever actually come into use, especially with the rate at which thermal optics are evolving.

[BS PALADIN]

Is there any thermal camo available or being researched. Because I think that would be more valuable.

[Pave Low]

OK, I've fixed the poll to give better options (as one of them seems more likely than the other)

all previous votes have been reset please vote now

[Johnny]

Is there any thermal camo available or being researched. Because I think that would be more valuable.

Come now,everyone has seen Predator 2 lol.

[Forrester]

I've seen cloaking devices being tested and apart from thermal they do work. HULC whah? dunno what it is.....

as for gameplay, I'd rather see some OICW variant come back than more predators or other gadgets.

They should emphasise on better guns of these days (automatic shotgun firing rounds up to 200 meters and having delayed detonations after wind-shield penetration) or more anti-sniper tools that would place us in a current warfare stituation with snipers and roadside bombs with a tactical advantage of the near future. (maybe somwhat unrealistic but not too far out)

That niche would make a real tactical shooter IMO, slower paced, RECON! and still frontline action to save regular army troops that arent that well trained and equipped. That sounds like the ultimate game to me.... a good mix of stealth, action, future and current tech playeable and attractive to many (more mature gamers taht are frustrated right now) the action should be with shorter target goals than ARMA has (more close combat, and urban combat with doors) and not too fast paced for the runners and gunners (no jumping, but climbing like arma OK)

Edited February 11, 2010 by Forrester

[JohnTC02]

I'm not to sure if we will see the Cloak showing up in anyone's inventory within the next ten years but the HULC I think is a different matter, it's already a working prototype and looks quite compact, ten years is quite a long time to develop new technology so for me it looks quite plausible.

I thought most people here would know what the HULC is but for those that don't take a look at this short video of the Lockheed exoskeleton.

all previous votes have been reset please vote now

I voted before you fixed the poll Pave but I am unable to vote again.

[Pave Low]

I voted before you fixed the poll Pave but I am unable to vote again.

OK, PM me what choices you want and I'll manually add them

[BS PALADIN]

It was a serious question. What's the point of having a visual light cloak if you can still easily be seen by thermal imaging.

Edited February 11, 2010 by BS PALADIN

[Pave Low]

Is there any thermal camo available or being researched

Yes, there are already camouflage uniforms/netting/paint and other materials available and in use today that block/mask thermal imaging

*Also UV and other wavelengths used in scopes/sights/detectors

[krise madsen]

The HULC has already been proven to work to the point of being a practical application, so it's basically an engineering issue from here on (endurance, reliability and affordability). Ten years? I suppose that's feasible. I'll be generous and give it a fifty-fifty chance.

As for cloaking, I guess it depends on whether we're talking about some form of adaptive camouflage of the good-but-not-perfect-and-works-in-some-situations-but-not-others or Harry Potter-level invisibility. The former, 50% (and that's being generous); the latter, no way.

As for the poll (I can't re-vote either), I say it's a game, whatever the devs feel like is fine with me.

[Pave Low]

As for the poll (I can't re-vote either)

I have manually added your votes to the poll

anyone else who already voted, PM me or post here your three answers and I'll add them too

[NoQuarter]

OK, I've fixed the poll to give better options (as one of them seems more likely than the other)

Thanks, I should have phrased it better, and allow A/B options.

[BS PALADIN]

Is there any thermal camo available or being researched

Yes, there are already camouflage uniforms/netting/paint and other materials available and in use today that block/mask thermal imaging

*Also UV and other wavelengths used in scopes/sights/detectors

Thanks. That is something we should see in GR not a invisibility cloak.

[AlienShogun]

Is there any thermal camo available or being researched. Because I think that would be more valuable.

Thermal signatures especially on a human body are hard to mask. The problem is when you effectively cover up the thermal signature on a human you also seal his body from being able to breath. This can cause over heating very quickly. If you were to use it, it would have to be limited use. The other issue is that no matter what you cover a person with it will eventually heat up itself, even from outside friction from movement.

That is why thermal sights are so effective, anything dealing with movement will create friction thus creating heat, anything on a warm blooded creature will eventually heat up. It is EXTREMELY hard to hide, and at this point is impossible to hide for extended periods.

Is there any thermal camo available or being researched

Yes, there are already camouflage uniforms/netting/paint and other materials available and in use today that block/mask thermal imaging

*Also UV and other wavelengths used in scopes/sights/detectors

None of them for sustained use, and none of them 100%

As for the reactive camo, it is effective for one reason, most of the time ROE prevents you from engaging until you have a positive ID on your target, a thermal ID is not good enough unless you know 100% that where you are looking there is no chance of civilian/friendlies, which is in a combat zone especially in this day and age is almost never.

Edited February 11, 2010 by AlienShogun

[BS PALADIN]

Thermal signatures especially on a human body are hard to mask. The problem is when you effectively cover up the thermal signature on a human you also seal his body from being able to breath. This can cause over heating very quickly. If you were to use it, it would have to be limited use. The other issue is that no matter what you cover a person with it will eventually heat up itself, even from outside friction from movement.

That is why thermal sights are so effective, anything dealing with movement will create friction thus creating heat, anything on a warm blooded creature will eventually heat up. It is EXTREMELY hard to hide, and at this point is impossible to hide for extended periods.

None of them for sustained use, and none of them 100%

As for the reactive camo, it is effective for one reason, most of the time ROE prevents you from engaging until you have a positive ID on your target, a thermal ID is not good enough unless you know 100% that where you are looking there is no chance of civilian/friendlies, which is in a combat zone especially in this day and age is almost never.

If thermal signatures are so hard to mask doesnt that negate the effectiveness of the invisibility cloak. I mean the enemy could easily do a sweep with his thermal scope ( im sure they will have them in the 'near future' ) and find the wearer. Even if there are civilians on the area its only western forces that care about civilians casualities. The enemy just wont give a ######.

Edited February 11, 2010 by BS PALADIN

[TheNatureRoy]

Predicting the future is an impossible task, and things you expect to be coming end up hopelessly delayed or are never adequately developed (flying cars), while things you could have never predicted pop up and change the world in relatively quick fashion (GPS).

That said, if I had to guess, exoskeletons might be fielded by ground troops in 20-25 years or so. Stand-alone active camo like that portrayed in the game is probably closer to 40-60 years away.

Of course nano-tech advancements might be a complete game-changer and switch things up in ways we can't even comprehend.

Ghost Recon: Future Soldier ('the sci-fi game') might be cool, but it's a complete joke to try to argue that any of this stuff will be on the field by 2020. Consider how much different the battlefield is today compared with ten years ago (not all that much). The 2020 they are portraying is about as far removed from 2010 as 2010 is from 1960.

It took almost ten years to design, develop, approve, and field a freakin assault rifle (FN SCAR)!

Edited February 11, 2010 by TheNatureRoy

[AlienShogun]

If thermal signatures are so hard to mask doesnt that negate the effectiveness of the invisibility cloak. I mean the enemy could easily do a sweep with his thermal scope ( im sure they will have them in the 'near future' ) and find the wearer. Even if there are civilians on the area its only western forces that care about civilians casualities. The enemy just wont give a ######.

You clearly didn't read the whole thread. I already said that is the main downfall of reactive camo. Also, your assessment of other countries "concern" for civilians on the battlefield is ignorant, "we" aren't the only ones who try not to hurt non combatants.

[BS PALADIN]

Western countries sometimes arent that concerned about civilian casualities either. But name me another non western countries that puts limited civilian casulaities over completing war objectives?

[AlienShogun]

Predicting the future is an impossible task, and things you expect to be coming end up hopelessly delayed or are never adequately developed (flying cars), while things you could have never predicted pop up and change the world in relatively quick fashion (GPS).

That said, if I had to guess, exoskeletons might be fielded by ground troops in 20-25 years or so. Stand-alone active camo like that portrayed in the game is probably closer to 40-60 years away.

Of course nano-tech advancements might be a complete game-changer and switch things up in ways we can't even comprehend.

Ghost Recon: Future Soldier ('the sci-fi game') might be cool, but it's a complete joke to try to argue that any of this stuff will be on the field by 2020. Consider how much different the battlefield is today compared with ten years ago (not all that much). The 2020 they are portraying is about as far removed from 2010 as 2010 is from 1960.

It took almost ten years to design, develop, approve, and field a freakin assault rifle (FN SCAR)!

There are a ton of things in the field RIGHT NOW that were not possible 10 years ago, let alone in the 60s. The SCAR is a result of numerous trial and error prototypes and concepts. It didn't take 10 years to make the scar, it took 10 years of looking through the candidates to finally settle and adopt a the new weapon.

Western countries sometimes arent that concerned about civilian casualities either. But name me another non western countries that puts limited civilian casulaities over completing war objectives?

Any Nato nation would be a start.

Turkey would be a good example from nato, Japan would also be in that boat in this day and age.

I'm beginning to see a terrible trend on this forum of people who either don't read a whole thread before commenting, or don't know what they are talking about in the 1st place when they do comment.

Edited February 11, 2010 by AlienShogun

[BS PALADIN]

Both are considered Western countries. Along with Australia and New Zealand.

[AlienShogun]

Both are considered Western countries. Along with Australia and New Zealand.

Wow, you clearly have no idea what Western means.

I'm done talking with you as well on this forum, where are the people who actually know what they are talking about when they decide to get into a conversation?

I hate wasting my time with people who act like they know what is going on, or ignorantly think they know what is going on.

Edited February 11, 2010 by AlienShogun

[BS PALADIN]

Western countries are based on idealogy not geographically location. I thought everyone knew that. Its a Cold War term.

[TheNatureRoy]

There are a ton of things in the field RIGHT NOW that were not possible 10 years ago, let alone in the 60s. The SCAR is a result of numerous trial and error prototypes and concepts. It didn't take 10 years to make the scar, it took 10 years of looking through the candidates to finally settle and adopt a the new weapon.

Exactly! It took ten years simply due to bureaucratic reasons. Now consider that same bureaucratic molasses must be overcome in addition to the not-insignificant technological breakthroughs required for these items when attempting to imagine when they might actually be fielded. These technologies aren't anywhere close to being fashioned in a form ready for use in the field, and even when they are, it will still take years before they are actually in use outside of the lab.

Right now they don't even work properly. When they do, they must not only work properly, but be durable, long-lasting, reliable, and effective. And even at that point, you have to cut through red tape. To think something is going to go from 'wouldn't it be cool if...' to the field in a handful of years is nuts.

The F-22 was on paper in 1980. It first flew as a prototype in 1990. It didn't enter active service until 2005.